communication education paper
5 Among the better predictors of persistence is goal realization, the ability of a student to articulate in their own words why they are in college and what they intend to do with their education. This chapter explores the importance of goal realization to student success and the kinds of policies and practices that when enacted well can help students make meaning of and appreciate the relevance of their experiences inside and outside the classroom to their personal circumstances.
Making Learning Meaningful: Engaging Students in Ways That Matter to Them
George D. Kuh
No topic has received more attention in the higher education literature dur- ing the past half century than the rates at which different groups of students complete their educational objectives and what colleges and institutions should do to help more students finish what they start. The most widely used term to refer to these outcomes is “student retention.” Personally es- chewing the retention term, I advocate using “persistence” to describe what is required for students to attain their postsecondary educational goals. But whatever term is used, the phenomenon it represents is of significant inter- est to every group with a stake in assuring that U.S. colleges and universities perform at high levels.
Student engagement is another construct that in recent years has caught the fancy of the higher education community as well as the pop- ular media, in large part because engagement is positively related to persis- tence, satisfaction, and a host of desired learning and personal development outcomes. Although engagement has multiple meanings and applications, I use it here to represent the time and energy undergraduates put forth in ed- ucationally purposeful activities combined with the policies, programs, and practices that institutions employ to induce students to put forth such effort (Kuh 2003). That is, both student effort and institutional effort are needed to increase the odds that all students will complete their studies and grad- uate with the knowledge and proficiencies they need to survive and thrive in the twenty-first century.
NEW DIRECTIONS FOR TEACHING AND LEARNING, no. 145, Spring 2016 © 2016 Wiley Periodicals, Inc. Published online in Wiley Online Library (wileyonlinelibrary.com) • DOI: 10.1002/tl.20174 49
50 FINDING THE WHY: PERSONALIZING LEARNING IN HIGHER EDUCATION
In this chapter, I discuss an aspect of the student experience related to both persistence and engagement to which too little attention has been paid, a behavioral construct I call goal realization. I discuss why goal realiza- tion is important and illustrate some of the practices that can help students distill meaning from their studies and connect what they are learning from their courses to their lives outside the classroom. In this way, institutions can increase the likelihood that more students will engage in more mean- ingful ways with their studies and other important aspects of the college experience, which will, in turn, encourage and support them to persist and achieve at higher levels.
First, a few more words about the importance of persistence and en- gagement to helping students acquire the proficiencies they need to maxi- mize the benefits of the postsecondary experience and prepare them to be economically self-sufficient and civically responsible after college.
Why Persistence and Engagement Matter
One of the persistent criticisms of U.S. colleges and universities is that de- spite decades of concern they have been unable to move the proverbial college completion needle, which is generally understood to be stuck at about 55 percent of those who initially enroll in college full-time and even- tually finish with a certificate or degree. This low number is typically based on a combined six-year graduate rate for baccalaureate granting institu- tions and three-year rate for students seeking associate degrees. However, such reports do not take into account studies that follow students for 12 or more years, including those who leave one state and enroll in institutions in other states. These longer-term analyses find that completion rates are much higher, perhaps as high as 70 percent. Even so, the dominant narra- tive is that postsecondary institutions have done too little to help too few students attain their goals.
While elements of such criticism are warranted, there are many com- plex factors that contribute to college persistence rates. True, not all stu- dents put forth the effort necessary to succeed in college. But who one is born to is the most important matter, as students from higher socioeco- nomic backgrounds are more likely to attend college right after high school and graduate. This is due in large part to the quality of their pre-college educational preparation and the cultural, economic, and social capital their families provide.
But as with most behavioral phenomena, it is more complicated than this. The complex patterns of social, cultural, and educational factors that contribute to disparities in college-going and completion rates among dif- ferent racial, ethnic, and socioeconomic groups have been summarized in various places. The most comprehensive treatment of these factors of which I am aware is contained in several papers commissioned by the National Postsecondary Education Cooperative almost a decade ago:
NEW DIRECTIONS FOR TEACHING AND LEARNING • DOI: 10.1002/tl
MAKING LEARNING MEANINGFUL 51
http://nces.ed.gov/npec/papers.asp. My contribution (Kuh et al. 2007) to this largely ignored treasure trove of information about student success identified eight student characteristics that threaten persistence:
1. Academically underprepared for college-level work 2. First-generation college student 3. Gap between high school and college 4. 30+ hours working per week 5. Part-time enrollment 6. Single parent 7. Financially independent 8. Children at home
The greater the number of these background characteristics a matricu- lating student has, the less likely it is that the student will persist and attain his or her educational goals. Institutions cannot directly affect these fac- tors, but they can help faculty and staff become sensitive to students with these characteristics; in fact, some colleges and universities have designed programs and course offerings to ameliorate the obstacles to participation in the educational process (Kuh et al. 2010).
But after a student starts classes, early interventions that directly ad- dress the factors that predict success are critical, especially in the first weeks and months of study. Institutional leaders, faculty, and staff should be cog- nizant of five such early college factors because they loom large in influ- encing whether students will engage in their academic pursuits and other aspects of undergraduate life at appropriate levels. They are:
1. Psychosocial fit—when students become part of an affinity group and perceive that there are others like them at the institution, these human connections contribute to a sense of social acceptance and personal efficacy.
2. Academic and social support—when students sense their campus is meeting their academic needs through study and academic skills pro- grams and opportunities for social interaction, they are more satisfied and tend to participate in various educationally purposeful activities at higher levels.
3. Involvement in the “right” kinds of activities—when students devote more time and effort to educationally purposeful activities (a major component of the engagement construct), they are more likely to per- sist and otherwise benefit from the college experience.
4. Academic trajectory—if students accumulate fewer than 15 hours of credit in the first academic year (which is the case for most part-time students), they are less likely to graduate.
5. Goal realization—when students find their studies personally mean- ingful, comprehend the relevance of what they are learning, and are
NEW DIRECTIONS FOR TEACHING AND LEARNING • DOI: 10.1002/tl
52 FINDING THE WHY: PERSONALIZING LEARNING IN HIGHER EDUCATION
able to apply at least some of what they are learning to some aspects of their lives they consider important, they are more likely to persist and be satisfied with their college experience.
The first three of these early college predictors of student success have received a fair amount of attention in the literature. And many if not most campuses have enacted policies, programs, and practices to address this trio of predictors. These interventions include learning communities, ser- vice learning courses, and first-year seminars, which—when implemented well—are among the 10 high-impact practices that are associated with per- sistence and learning (Kuh 2008); that is, students who participate in these programs are more engaged overall in the college experience and gain more from their studies (see also Kuh and O’Donnell 2013; Finley and McNair 2013). Moreover, while all students derive benefits from participating in high-impact practices, they seem to have a compensatory effect for students who are less well prepared academically or who are members of historically underserved groups; that is, the performance of such students seems to be greater as a result of the high-impact practice than what might be otherwise expected (Finley and McNair 2013).
It is difficult to directly and materially address the academic trajectory challenge without providing financial support that will enable students to attend college full-time. There are promising experiments underway, such as the new Guttman College in the CUNY system, where students are re- quired to attend full-time and receive sufficient financial, academic, and social support that makes it possible for them to participate in one or more high-impact practices. But such programs are rare, in large part because they are quite expensive.
As noted earlier, far less attention has been given to goal realization, which I consider to be a largely untapped but very promising area for in- terventions, especially those that combine classroom assignments with re- quired out-of-class applications.
Why Goal Realization Matters and What It Looks Like in Practice
As suggested earlier, goal realization is the ability of a student to articulate what he or she intends to get out of college and to make connections be- tween what he or she is learning inside and outside of class to priorities and activities that have value in the present moment. Unfortunately, the major- ity of undergraduates—especially but not only those matriculating imme- diately after high school—are not able to clarify in their mind’s eye, nor are they able to tell others in their own language what they hope to gain from college. Perhaps more important, they do not see and appreciate the rele- vance of what they are studying to things that matter in their lives. Keep in mind, too, that the vast majority of traditional-age students are in the
NEW DIRECTIONS FOR TEACHING AND LEARNING • DOI: 10.1002/tl
MAKING LEARNING MEANINGFUL 53
dualistic stage of intellectual and cognitive development. That is, they tend to see information as either right or wrong; ambiguity and complexity are beyond their grasp. Thus, dualistic students tend to overlook or avoid con- cepts and experiences that are very difficult to comprehend; they eschew such circumstances and much prefer fairly simple, straightforward expla- nations and activities that have concrete applications to practical problems or situations.
Now, consider Suzanne who—as with most 18-year-olds—has dual- istic tendencies. In her first academic term, she is taking a world history lecture-oriented course focused on events in the seventeenth century. She apprehends nothing in the readings or material discussed in class so far— the emergence of the Scientific Revolution, China losing about 30 percent of its population during the Ming dynasty, and the early decades of the European colonization of North America—that is germane to her declared elementary education major or how she might apply this information to what she envisions a third-grade classroom will be like. She does not see how anything she has heard so far can help her make sense of her rela- tionship with her roommate or applies to her part-time food service job on campus. For Suzanne, the world history class as well as her philosophy and general science classes—also large lectures—are at best uninteresting and at worst confusing and irrelevant to the pressing priorities in her life. Class quizzes and papers seem to emphasize recall of facts without an underlying foundation of why this information does or should matter.
Of course, there are many first-year students who are more advanced than Suzanne in their cognitive and intellectual development. And for some of them, certain lecture classes stimulate their thinking in ways that begin to spark connections between history, philosophy, and psychology. But this kind of thinking—a form of metacognition if you will—is beyond Suzanne’s intellectual grasp at the moment. As a result, Suzanne is spending more time wondering if she belongs in college. After all, no one else in her family has a college degree. Indeed, she’s the first one to even take college courses! Not only is Suzanne unable to find meaning in or use in a practical way anything she is supposed to be learning, staying in school is expensive and getting more so. Maybe, she thinks, it is time to accept the fact that she is not college material; perhaps she should cut her losses, leave school, and find a job before she takes on even more loan debt.
Kari could be Suzanne’s identical twin, at least so far as her intellectual and cognitive development are concerned. She’s also the first in her low- income family to go to college. It was a scary proposition to take this costly step. But after a few shaky weeks of uncertainty, Kari is now beginning to better understand what is expected of her and what she needs to do to suc- ceed. Equally important, she has found—or more accurately—her small 22- student first-year seminar class has placed her in situations where she has had to demonstrate and use what she is learning, not only in the classroom but outside of class as well. The seminar is organized around the theme
NEW DIRECTIONS FOR TEACHING AND LEARNING • DOI: 10.1002/tl
54 FINDING THE WHY: PERSONALIZING LEARNING IN HIGHER EDUCATION
of sustainability. As with all her other classes this first academic term, this seminar is part of the required general education component and happens to be taught by a faculty member from the English department. Like most other first-year seminars at her school, hers is writing intensive, in that four short papers are required, and each can be revised based on peer review and feedback from the instructor and the upper-division peer mentor assigned to the class. After what first appeared to Kari to be a lot of work (she did not write four papers her entire senior year of high school!), she already has noticed that her writing has improved and she is only halfway through the academic term. Moreover, the writing assignments are intentionally de- signed so that Kari has to apply at least three concepts introduced either from recent class readings or discussions to some aspect of sustainability efforts on campus, either underway or perceived by Kari to be needed in the near term. This kind of assignment required Kari to apply concepts— some of which are theoretical—to a concrete problem in a setting she is coming to know fairly well.
Kari also has the additional advantage of working at the welcome desk in the campus union, which is helping her see the relevance of what she is learning. Already, she has met twice with her supervisor, the associate director of the union, along with five other undergraduates, to discuss how they are applying what they are learning in their union jobs to their classes. And the discussion has already taken an opposite turn, so that she and her coworkers were asked to think about what she is learning in her classes that she can use on the job. At first, Kari was nonplussed. She had never before thought about the possible relationships between these different aspects of her life, let alone had to think aloud how her studies were informing what she did on her job and vice versa. But as her embarrassment subsided and she heard other students offer personal stories, Kari too began to see how, for example, giving feedback on a peer’s first-year seminar paper helped boost her confidence in her information desk role when responding to people asking questions about the campus.
Applying some of what she is learning in her first-year seminar is be- ginning to change the way she approaches her other classes, all but one of which are large lecture courses. That is, she now understands that part of being a good learner is figuring out how information can be used in dif- ferent situations. At the same time, Kari is developing a deeper capacity for thinking about her thinking and what she is learning, connecting her learn- ing experiences inside and outside of class, and transferring the meaning of these connections to other aspects of her life. And by discussing these ex- periences with her teachers, work supervisors, and peers, Kari is getting practice at how to describe her learning and what she can do with it, which will be invaluable when interviewing for subsequent jobs on campus and after college. Moreover, Kari sees value in what she is learning and how it can help her realize her ambition of being the first in her family to earn a college degree and become a schoolteacher. She no longer wonders whether
NEW DIRECTIONS FOR TEACHING AND LEARNING • DOI: 10.1002/tl
MAKING LEARNING MEANINGFUL 55
she has the right stuff to be in college. Indeed, Kari is beginning to use her mind in ways that are both rewarding and exciting.
Final Words
To my knowledge, no one has estimated the number of students who leave college prematurely because they were unable to find concrete, personally meaningful ways to apply at least some of what they are studying to their current situation and anticipated post-college lives. But many faculty and staff in colleges and universities—especially academic advisors—are famil- iar with something akin to Suzanne’s experience. Of course, many students like Suzanne summon the fortitude to stay in school. But imagine how many more students would continue their studies and deepen their learning in meaningful ways if they had one or more classes in their first college year and later that were structured like Kari’s.
As Pascarella and Terenzini (2005) pointed out, postsecondary insti- tutions must enact a variety of policies, programs, and practices to engage students more fully in educationally purposeful activities in order to help them succeed and enrich their learning. A laser-like focus on addressing goal realization is one of the few promising approaches that do not require additional resources to implement. Teaching and learning centers can begin immediately to include goal realization strategies in course redesign work- shops and other faculty development activities. Student employment of- fices and other campus partners, such as student affairs departments, can do their part by initiating structured supervisor–student worker conversa- tions about the connections between academics and job experiences, sim- ilar to the Guided Reflection on Work initiative at the University of Iowa (http://vp.studentlife.uiowa.edu/initiatives/grow/). Academic advisors also can play a key role by encouraging students to take part in high-impact practices that are often rich with activities that induce students to apply what they are learning to the kinds of unscripted problems they will surely face in the future.
When all is said and done, every college graduate today needs to demonstrate the capacity to reflect on experiences in and out of the class- room, to connect what they are learning from different courses, out-of-class experiences, and life beyond the institution, and to transfer and use what he or she has learned in different settings that present novel challenges and opportunities. Goal realization is a necessary condition toward these im- portant ends.
References
Finley, A. and T. McNair. 2013. Assessing Underserved Students’ Engagement in High- Impact Practices. Washington, DC: Association of American Colleges & Universities.
NEW DIRECTIONS FOR TEACHING AND LEARNING • DOI: 10.1002/tl
56 FINDING THE WHY: PERSONALIZING LEARNING IN HIGHER EDUCATION
Kuh, G. D. 2003. “What We’re Learning About Student Engagement from NSSE.” Change 35(2): 24–32.
Kuh, G. D. 2008. High-impact educational practices: What they are, who has access to them, and why they matter. Washington, DC: Association of American Colleges & Universi- ties.
Kuh, G. D., J. Kinzie, J. A. Buckley, B. K. Bridges, and J. C. Hayek. 2007. “Piecing To- gether the Student Success Puzzle: Research, Propositions, and Recommendations.” ASHE Higher Education Report 32(5). San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.
Kuh, G. D., and K. O’Donnell. 2013. Ensuring Quality and Taking High-Impact Practices to Scale. Washington, DC: Association of American Colleges & Universities.
Kuh, G.D., Kinzie, J., Schuh, J.H., Whitt, E.J., & Associates (2005/2010). Student success in college: Creating conditions that matter. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
Pascarella, E. T., and P. T. Terenzini. 2005. How College Affects Students: Vol. 2. A Third Decade of Research. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.
GEORGE D. KUH directs the National Institute of Learning Outcomes Assessment (NILOA) colocated at the University of Illinois and Indiana University. Found- ing director of the National Survey of Student Engagement, George has written and consulted extensively about learning outcomes assessment, institutional improvement, and student engagement.
NEW DIRECTIONS FOR TEACHING AND LEARNING • DOI: 10.1002/tl
Copyright of New Directions for Teaching & Learning is the property of John Wiley & Sons, Inc. and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use.